Boaz, Jachin, and the High Priestess

Tarot Orat

LRichard said:
Are you implying that the Holy of Holies קדש הקדשים is immediately inside the eastern entrance to the building?

I definitely didn't mean to imply that she was near the entrance to the temple itself - just that her back was to the east where the entrance was.

Abrac said:
Tarot, I'm curious why you wonder if the GD made a mistake. I was looking in Regardie's Golden Dawn book and found this in the "Fifth Knowledge Lecture," under the "Diagrams" section.

"That is, the white Mercy or Jachin Pillar is on your right hand as you approach the Altar from the West and from the Hiereus."

From this it sounds like Waite/Smith followed the GD colors & orientation, and the GD's in agreement with the Old Testament.

I agree THP is inside, the only thing that doesn't make sense is the veil isn't where you'd expect it to be. It may have been put there out of necessity.

I admittedly don't have a lot of Golden Dawn resources around, so I hadn't seen that before.

In any event, if she's deliberately placed facing inward, with the veil at her back, why do so many commentaries talk about her as being between us and the Holy of Holies/Mystery/etc.?

Maybe the Golden Dawn did know exactly what they were doing, but later commentaries didn't get it?

Richard

Tarot Orat said:
.......In any event, if she's deliberately placed facing inward, with the veil at her back, why do so many commentaries talk about her as being between us and the Holy of Holies/Mystery/etc.?......

Its fine to discuss Solomon's Temple, but the High Priestess is not in Solomon's Temple. The Pillars in Trump II are not the prototypical Jachin and Boaz Pillars on either side of the Porch of the Temple, they are symbolic pillars within a symbolic Temple patterned after a GD or Masonic lodge. Please read my last post.

The Golden Dawn is not literally based on the Bible, but it uses a lot of Biblical themes. Solomon's Temple no longer exists, but it is now an important concept. It's specific architectural features are interesting, but what is more important now is its symbolism, and the GD and the Freemasons have modified the details in order to adapt them to the lodges.

Tarot Orat

LRichard said:
Its fine to discuss Solomon's Temple, but the High Priestess in not in Solomon's Temple. The Pillars in Trump II are not the prototypical Jachin and Boaz Pillars on either side of the Porch of the Temple, they are symbolic pillars within a symbolic Temple patterned after a GD or Masonic lodge. Please read my last post.

The Golden Dawn is not literally based on the Bible, but it uses a lot of Biblical themes. Solomon's Temple no longer exists, but it is now an important concept. It's specific architectural features are interesting, but what is more important now is its symbolism, and the GD and the Freemasons have modified the details in order to adapt them to the lodges.

I'll keep that in mind :laugh:

I literally proofread Bibles for a living, so I know the text extremely well, and when working on a translation that used "north/south" instead of "left/right" for the position of the pillars, my Tarot-stuffed brain just needed to figure it out!

Zephyros

LRichard said:
Its fine to discuss Solomon's Temple, but the High Priestess in not in Solomon's Temple. The Pillars in Trump II are not the prototypical Jachin and Boaz Pillars on either side of the Porch of the Temple, they are symbolic pillars within a symbolic Temple patterned after a GD or Masonic lodge. Please read my last post.

Forgive me, I can get carried away sometimes.

In any case, although I do think the figure itself represents the Ark, I do agree with you about the orientation of the pillars, they can't make sense otherwise.

ravenest

LRichard said:
The Golden Dawn is not literally based on the Bible, but it uses a lot of Biblical themes. Solomon's Temple no longer exists, but it is now an important concept. It's specific architectural features are interesting, but what is more important now is its symbolism, and the GD and the Freemasons have modified the details in order to adapt them to the lodges.

Yes. This is what happens with the construction of dramatic ritual. Think film set or Hollywood version of an 'historical' story.

The idea is not to display anything historically or 'actuall' it is to create an effect or change in conciousness or perception. Where a significant idea or theme seems important that might be bought forward as it was ... or it might be morphed to create the effect desired for that moment.

This process of 'distillation' or 'magical (artistic) liscence' is further distilled in things like tracing boards and perhaps further distilled (or slightly epanded) in some tarot cards.

... I'm off to check the pentacles/Royal Arch .... thanks for that tip.

Richard

ravenest said:
Yes. This is what happens with the construction of dramatic ritual. Think film set or Hollywood version of an 'historical' story........

Yes, what happens are reenactments of historical and symbolic events. Even beyond obvious ritual, as the Bard says, "All the world's a stage." Thanks for that insight.

Tarot Orat said:
I'll keep that in mind I literally proofread Bibles for a living, so I know the text extremely well, and when working on a translation that used "north/south" instead of "left/right" for the position of the pillars, my Tarot-stuffed brain just needed to figure it out!

It can be confusing. I think there are apparent "inconsistancies" in the Bible, since it was penned by different people at different times, describing the same things from different perspectives.

closrapexa said:
Forgive me, I can get carried away sometimes.

Not really. You have remarkable insight insight into what's going on. I am the outsider, now and then stealing a glimpse through a crack in the wall.

In any case, although I do think the figure itself represents the Ark, I do agree with you about the orientation of the pillars, they can't make sense otherwise.

Indeed, Waite associates her with the Shekinah. "There are some respects in which this card is the highest and holiest of the Greater Arcana."

bogiesan

A bit off topic

When I opened up my first Albano-Waite deck in 1970 or so, I dealt spreads for my girlfriend. As I was looking up the High Priestess in the LWB, Karen asked me, "Isn't that Joan Baez? The costume shows her as the mystical and spiritual leader for our generation."

B and J, since that day, have been and always will be, Baez and Joan.

Richard

bogiesan said:
When I opened up my first Albano-Waite deck in 1970 or so, I dealt spreads for my girlfriend. As I was looking up the High Priestess in the LWB, Karen asked me, "Isn't that Joan Baez? The costume shows her as the mystical and spiritual leader for our generation."

B and J, since that day, have been and always will be, Baez and Joan.

Brilliant!!! My first deck was an Albano-Waite, purchased around 1969-70 at a metaphysical book store in Berkeley CA, where Joan Baez was practically God.

ravenest

more material for 'intuitive' readers

Richard

ravenest said:
more material for 'intuitive' readers

Aaaaarrrggghh!

I detest Rorschach Inkblot Test readings (Hmmmm, 10 of Swords. You may need accupuncture for that back problem.) It may give insight into the subconscious of the reader, but that's about all. If that were what Tarot is all about, I would literally toss all my decks into the trash, and spit on them before I close the bag.

Boaz, Jachin, and the High Priestess

Tarot Orat

Richard

Tarot Orat

Zephyros

ravenest

Richard

bogiesan

Richard

ravenest

Richard